As I pointed out very early in this discussion, the central message of the bible could hardly be clearer. That central message is the one you have a real issue with.

There is no "central message". You have 66 "books" written by 40+ different authors, many of whom cannot agree with each other (and contradict one another quite regularly in there). You have Jews, Christians, and Muslims (and hundreds of others from thousands of different sects and religions) who cannot agree on doctrines that are considered "central".

And somehow you think there's a "central message"? No, this assertion is just a demonstration that you ASSUMED your position on the bible from the outset. You took the backwards-easy route of starting with your conclusion.

As I pointed out very early in this discussion, the central message of the bible could hardly be clearer. That central message is the one you have a real issue with.

Emphasis mine

What does the bolded sentence mean? Could you restate that more specifically please?

Sure. The central message of the bible is that God created us to live in relationship with Him, but that relationship has been severed by sin, firstly at the garden of eden and then ever since. God can't dwell with sin, but He promised a way for the relationship to be restored. That way was Jesus, who died on a cross avut was resurrected. He will return as God's judge and all those who have not trusted in Him will perish.

Do you believe any of that? No. That drives all discussion/disgareement you and all atheists have about the bible.

To suggest that the fact some passages require careful consideration and lead to disagreement is a reason for disbelief is not true. The dis-belief was already there.

I don't expect for one second that, even if I could have you all concede that some passages do not mean what you claim they do, you would suddenly come to faith in God.

However, I will all the same defend the bible and the methodology used to help us best understand many of the passages.

Yeah, just like Muslims do with the Koran and Mormons do with the book of Mormon. Big whoop! That's just another example (amidst the thousands of examples) of religious SPIN. You can "defend" any mythical, non-demonstrable, non-falsifiable assertion (from any alleged holy book or relic story from the past) with rationalizations/favored interpretations and pretend it's all OK b/c your interpretation fixes the problem (but it doesn't). Saying it is so doesn't make it so (especially when this is something you are so heavily invested in, and can't afford to lose).

Would you accept your own argument if a Muslim made it toward you? How about if every time you demonstrated how the Koran/Hadith could not be reliable he pulled out his "context card" and handed it to you (metaphorically speaking). "Koran out of context, my friend! It's true but you won't see it!" Would that work for you? Would you accept his argument and agree with his assertion that the Koran is sound?

This "methodology" you're using is one (just like the other religions) that makes the huge assumption that it is "the word of God". Would you trust a salesman at your front door who used reasoning like this? "Yes sir, this potion is magic. I knew it when I first heard about it and read the articles."

Magicmiles has a central message that he can project onto the Bible. Other people do too. It's a way of avoiding responsibility.

Have you read the bible start to finish? Did you see any central message shining through?

Yes, I've read the bible multiple times. As a former born-again Christian evangelist, pastor, and "defender of the faith" (for nearly 20 years) I attempted to use the exact same arguments you are now attempting to make. But they are flawed b/c they START with the assumption that your bible is "God breathed". Just b/c those 66 different documents have one nice leathery cover around them doesn't at all mean there is a central message (unless of course you're willing to admit that the central message is fiction). HINT: The Jews don't agree with you on that message! And neither do thousands of other religious people who are reading/interpreting that text.

There is no central message. There is only a PERCEIVED central message based upon what you assumed from the outset. Perhaps more importantly, even IF you could demonstrate that there was a central message 1) that would in no way show that any of it is true or accurate and 2) it wouldn't mean your personal interpretation is the correct one.

As I pointed out very early in this discussion, the central message of the bible could hardly be clearer. That central message is the one you have a real issue with.

Emphasis mine

What does the bolded sentence mean? Could you restate that more specifically please?

Sure. The central message of the bible is that God created us to live in relationship with Him, but that relationship has been severed by sin, firstly at the garden of eden and then ever since. God can't dwell with sin, but He promised a way for the relationship to be restored. That way was Jesus, who died on a cross avut was resurrected. He will return as God's judge and all those who have not trusted in Him will perish.

mm, I swear on whatever you would deem acceptable that I am not trying to pick a fight with you. I'm really, really not. I know that you are being very sincere, and very patient, and I appreciate it. I'm being equally sincere in return.

I used to believe in God. Completely, unquestionably, believed that God existed, and was aware of me, specifically and personally, and was interested in and actively supporting my best interests. I sought to feel "the presence of the Lord". I prayed. I defended my beliefs when questioned, which was admittedly rare. And I in turn asked questions. I questioned my mother*. I went to a parochial elementary school so I questioned the nuns. When their answers didn't satisfy me, I was sent to the priest, and bless his heart, he did his best to answer my queries so that I could understand what was expected of me as a child of God. I want to be very clear - that was my motivation, I wanted to know what was expected of me as a child of God.

(*my father married into religion, so I figured my mom was a more reliable source, since learned everything he knew about it from her anyway. I believed THAT because, well duh, he didn't know about God until he wanted to marry my mom, and God wouldn't be able to recognize their marriage if my dad didn't go to church and believe in God too. I admit that I thought that meant that he wouldn't be able to pick them out of a crowd - I was pretty young, but also, I was THAT kind of believer - adopted into a Catholic family where God's presence is a given. The Ten Commandments were written on the wall at the end of the bedroom hallway, and Jesus watched over our television set from his place on the wall, right next to the Pope)

Now, to be fair, I came out of the gate with tough questions. I opened with the Trinity, and that kept me going for several months, trying to make some sort of sense of the answers gathered from all parties. Eventually I just gave up and accepted that God's ways were mysterious and that faith was the answer. So we moved on to faith.... you know, in retrospect I was a very challenging child, although I totally didn't get that at the time.... and the faith thing kept me gong for the next few years. They never should have used the phrase "blind faith"and I suspect my mother would have cheerfully strangled the priest for sending me home with that one.

Then, in my early adolescence, our church hosted a visiting statue of Mary (or as my grandmother would say "theblessedvirginmary") that criedabout abortion. Things began to get a bit warm when I had the audacity to ask how they knew what she was crying about, and they got downright hot when I finally had the sense to ask what, exactly, the Catholic church's position on abortion meant for a pregnant mother in danger of dying with kids already at home.

None of the people who were, according to the belief system that I was raised in, the ones who's job it was guide me on my journey as a child of Christ, were able to give satisfactory non-conflicting answers to a kid. On the single most important topic of my life no less!

Then I had a friend who's mother left his father for a woman, and I really understood just how much the church didn't seem to give a sh!t about real people, the church gave a sh!t about being obeyed. I finally understood that the problem wasn't God, the problem was people.

And that carried me along for years. I still believed in God, I just figured that people were really stupid and had completely missed the point. For what it's worth, that's still pretty much what I believe, except for the existence of an actual god entity.

Quote

Do you believe any of that? No. That drives all discussion/disgareement you and all atheists have about the bible.

To suggest that the fact some passages require careful consideration and lead to disagreement is a reason for disbelief is not true. The dis-belief was already there.

I don't expect for one second that, even if I could have you all concede that some passages do not mean what you claim they do, you would suddenly come to faith in God.

However, I will all the same defend the bible and the methodology used to help us best understand many of the passages.

And here's the part I want to talk about. My disbelief in God is not in any way based on the accuracy or lack thereof, of the bible. It's not based on empirical evidence. It's not because everything I know about science indicates that a god is not necessary for the existence of the universe, or of humanity. None of these things are why, although they all serve to reinforce and support my disbelief.

I don't believe in god. Or God. Or Allah, Thor, Ba'al, Isis, Zeus or Aphrodite - I'm a gender neutral atheist, I disbelieve in god and goddesses equally. This is beyond my control. If i woke up tomorrow determined to believe in god, I could fake it, and probably fake it well if circumstance required it - I used to believe so I know the routine. Here's the problem - if I somehow turned out to be completely wrong and god does, in fact, exist, and bears any resemblance to god of the bible, he would know I'd been faking and I'd fry anyway.

Do you really believe us when we say we don't believe in god, God, or gods? Sometimes I think you don't quite believe how much we're not kidding (you or ourselves) about our lack of belief. It's not a light switch that can be turned on and off at will - either you believe or you don't.

Hi, holybuckets. Nice to see you back. To what is your post responding? The OP? Please clarify. It will help us answer your question.

Thanks Screwtape,The post is the original post: "Demonstrate your deity. Your bible (Mark 16, John 14) commands you to do miracles (greater works than 'he' supposedly did), and it also commands you to defend your faith with reasoned argument (1 Peter 3:15, Jude 1), just as Paul "reasoned" with the Jews."

First of all, as a Christian, Jesus never commanded me to do miracles. I have a couple of card tricks, but that's about it. Secondly, 1 Peter says to give answers "for the reason of hope'.. unfortunately for you guys....... well, let's just say, I don't have to give you an answer... and finally, in giving atheists answers, Matthew 10:14 says: "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet." So, in answer to the original poster... there's your answer!

The problem here is that the "central message" of Christianity, or any religion for that matter, depends on the interpretation people give to their holy texts. I've read virtually all of the Old Testament, and I can honestly say that if there was a "central message" to it, it was that the only reasons humans existed was to obey YHWH slavishly and in every particular, and if they didn't, bad things would happen to them and their country. Oddly enough, at the hands of invaders/conquerors (the Hittites, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, and the Romans), which weren't believers in the Jewish religion. Time and time again, Israel was conquered and the inhabitants enslaved, and by those who didn't believe in their god. In other words, YHWH was either not willing to lift a hand to spare his disobedient people from the horrors of being conquered, even when it meant that they were exiled from their promised land, or he actively connived to cause the invasions.

I suppose you can call that a relationship. You can also call a person living with an abusive spouse a relationship. Doesn't mean I'd want a part of either one.

The problem here is that the "central message" of Christianity, or any religion for that matter, depends on the interpretation people give to their holy texts. I've read virtually all of the Old Testament, and I can honestly say that if there was a "central message" to it, it was that the only reasons humans existed was to obey YHWH slavishly and in every particular, and if they didn't, bad things would happen to them and their country. Oddly enough, at the hands of invaders/conquerors (the Hittites, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, and the Romans), which weren't believers in the Jewish religion. Time and time again, Israel was conquered and the inhabitants enslaved, and by those who didn't believe in their god. In other words, YHWH was either not willing to lift a hand to spare his disobedient people from the horrors of being conquered, even when it meant that they were exiled from their promised land, or he actively connived to cause the invasions.

I suppose you can call that a relationship. You can also call a person living with an abusive spouse a relationship. Doesn't mean I'd want a part of either one.

QFT

Thing that the religious dont seem to grasp is that this story of obeying god and punishments for not obeying makes absolutely no sense from an outside observer. We have the supposed god over EVERYTHING punishing people who disobey him using people who dont even recognize his existence. If the story were to make sense then either both groups would be punished, OR the atheistic group punished by the "chosen" people.

However, in the OT we do get the latter, however, again from an outside observer it doesnt make a lick of sense. We have god helping his "chosen" people slaughter the not chosen people because they did not believe, because they werent the "chosen" people. Perhaps if yahweh had revealed himself to the non chose instead of the hebrews maybe the roles would be reversed.

And it completely ignores that yahweh is sposed to be the god of everyone. Then when you try to heap the NT on top of already absurd text you get, well, you get what we have now....

I wasn't asking you. I've found asking you questions to be a frustrating exercise.

Only b/c you assumed that if I didn't answer a question in the way you wanted me to, then the answer wasn't valid.

Humour me. Link to the section of your post(s) that you think has answered my questions. Lets throw it open for other to decide.

Wow, we're still on this? I answered in Socratic fashion (which btw had a double purpose). I asked if you take the passages regarding the resurrection of Jesus, Yahweh creating man instantaneously out of nothing, water into wine, the virgin birth, the 'miracles' in the book of Acts etc etc as 'literal' in order to 1) find out what exactly you mean when you use the term (which never happened) and 2) if you're answer was yes, then to answer the question via your own answer.

Jesus specifically commands his followers (not just the ones back then) to do miracles. But of course when some Christians don't see the miraculous happening today they spin the text, instead of admitting these holy book claims are just false. They (like I anticipate you will attempt) can see that, "No Modern Events Have the Characteristics of Bible Miracles." And say the reason (really a rationalization) is, "Spiritual Gifts Are No Longer Needed, Because They Have Fulfilled Their Purpose."

HA! What a perfect way to build into your belief system an immunity from evidence (while trying to 'concoct the context' - make up your own version of Christianity as you go, which is basically what happened back then). Mark 16 clearly commands that believers WILL do the miraculous. He allegedly said, "And these signswill accompany those who believe..." Now, if you'd like to point to passages that contradict this (some have tried 1 Cor 13) great! The bible contradicts itself (throughout). It is only those who ASSUME the bible is "God breathed" who are attempting to STILL give it a pass. But that is hypocrisy b/c you would NOT give a pass to other religions when they try the same trick.

"I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father."- Gospel of John 14:12-13 NIV

If anyone can be found to be 'context dropping' is would be you apologists who can see deep down that your theology is bunk and that this stuff just doesn't hold water. Yet, you've made such a heavy investment in your socialized worldview that it would be socially suicidal to give it up and walk away - thus causing you to spin, rationalize, context drop, pick n choose, practice confirmation bias, and hold a double standard instead of being honest.

Why would anyone think the bible (or any other holy book) is divine, or "from God"?? Who gave you this idea and why did you buy it?

I haven't looked very carefully at what JW's believe. My understanding (which may be flawed) of their beliefs is that they combine some elements of biblical teaching with some additions of their own which are apprently imparted by angels. I do know that they believe some things which go directly against what the bible teaches.

They take the Bible as a literal document from start to finish, and interpret scripture on the basis of help from the holy spirit, which they consider to be god's "active force" and not an actual being. I was just curious how it would compare to your version, and it's not far off. I think that if there's any common thread through the Bible, it's that goodness was lost to mankind and god created a plan to restore it. I don't have a problem with the central theme, it's pretty straightforward.

Hi, holybuckets. Nice to see you back. To what is your post responding? The OP? Please clarify. It will help us answer your question.

Thanks Screwtape,The post is the original post: "Demonstrate your deity. Your bible (Mark 16, John 14) commands you to do miracles (greater works than 'he' supposedly did), and it also commands you to defend your faith with reasoned argument (1 Peter 3:15, Jude 1), just as Paul "reasoned" with the Jews."

First of all, as a Christian, Jesus never commanded me to do miracles. I have a couple of card tricks, but that's about it. Secondly, 1 Peter says to give answers "for the reason of hope'.. unfortunately for you guys....... well, let's just say, I don't have to give you an answer... and finally, in giving atheists answers, Matthew 10:14 says: "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet." So, in answer to the original poster... there's your answer!

Have you read the passages? Jesus IS (allegedly) commanding you to do the works he did (and greater). He states:

"I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father."- Gospel of John 14:12-13 NIV

Now, why have you assumed the bible is the "word of God"? And why are you trying to defend it against all criticism and/or refutation?

Demonstrate your deity. Your bible (Mark 16, John 14) commands you to do miracles (greater works than 'he' supposedly did), and it also commands you to defend your faith with reasoned argument (1 Peter 3:15, Jude 1), just as Paul "reasoned" with the Jews.

I am betting that absolutely none (zero) of you Christians will be able, or willing to adequately finish this challenge. My prediction is 2 fold (for those that actually take the challenge - because most of you believers have no confidence in your beliefs and won't take the challenge). But for those who do, you will either...

1) Obfuscate or avoid the tough questions and eventually give up or leave, or...2) End the discussion by saying something like, "Well, I just have faith."

Neither of these are adequate responses but if you wish to actually do what your bible tells you, then please bring your A game and demonstrate (not just claim) how you know your deity Yahweh is actually real.

In respect of the performing of miracles, my understanding has always been that this was a specific gift provided to the early apostles as a means of establishing the early church. Seemed to work, too.

What was your understanding of these passages back when you were a Christian apologist?

To answer this ONE MORE TIME (so there is no confusion), I took the text to mean what they said and said what they mean (specifically the two passages listed) - that "all who have faith" WILL do miracles (and greater). You can attempt to point to passages that allegedly contradict this view, but then I say fine! The bible contradicts itself and the only reason you're attempting to defend it is because you have a pre-commitment to make it seem as if it doesn't (and, as I mentioned in another post, what a convenient way to make your view immune from having to provide solid evidence and demonstration!).

So again, why are you believing and defending that your bible is "the word of God"? What makes you think this book is in any way "divine" in origin? Please don't just make claims...demonstrate.

And here's the part I want to talk about. My disbelief in God is not in any way based on the accuracy or lack thereof, of the bible. It's not based on empirical evidence. It's not because everything I know about science indicates that a god is not necessary for the existence of the universe, or of humanity. None of these things are why, although they all serve to reinforce and support my disbelief.

I don't believe in god. Or God. Or Allah, Thor, Ba'al, Isis, Zeus or Aphrodite - I'm a gender neutral atheist, I disbelieve in god and goddesses equally. This is beyond my control. If i woke up tomorrow determined to believe in god, I could fake it, and probably fake it well if circumstance required it - I used to believe so I know the routine. Here's the problem - if I somehow turned out to be completely wrong and god does, in fact, exist, and bears any resemblance to god of the bible, he would know I'd been faking and I'd fry anyway.

Do you really believe us when we say we don't believe in god, God, or gods? Sometimes I think you don't quite believe how much we're not kidding (you or ourselves) about our lack of belief. It's not a light switch that can be turned on and off at will - either you believe or you don't.

I suspect your experience is quite common. It seems pretty common amongst members here.

Faith is obviously a personal experience, and I find its next to impossible to try and explain my own personal faith.

I see the same evidence regarding the existence of the world as you (although I am not good with science, I understand the basic premise behind the big bang, evolution and natural selection). I look at the world around me. Not just the physical world, but the behaviour of human. When I think about it deeply, as I have many times, I always arrive at the same conclusions - the biblical account of how this world came to be makes sense. The alternate theories on how this world came to be simply don't.

Does the bible make complete sesne to me? Of course not. But on the whole, I find it compelling.

Do you know the people who find it most compelling, in my experience? Those who have read it with absolutely zero exposure to Christian teaching.

For me to deny God's existence would be dishonest. I know what I believe.

I will be completely honest here, and then sit back and count the down-votes:

I do not believe there is a single member of this forum who does not believe, somewhere in a part of their heart and soul, that God exists. Including you.

I see the same evidence regarding the existence of the world as you (although I am not good with science, I understand the basic premise behind the big bang, evolution and natural selection). I look at the world around me. Not just the physical world, but the behaviour of human. When I think about it deeply, as I have many times, I always arrive at the same conclusions - the biblical account of how this world came to be makes sense. The alternate theories on how this world came to be simply don't.

magic, with respect, there is evidence backing up the Big Bang and other naturalistic explanations of the universe we find ourselves in. There is zero verifiable, empirical evidence for it being deliberately created by any god, much less the Biblical one.

Does the bible make complete sesne to me? Of course not. But on the whole, I find it compelling.

Glad you admit that the bible is at times opaque to you. That you find it compelling is unsurprising, given that is the predominate religious view (correct me if I'm wrong) in your native culture and upbringing. There are Muslims, Hindus and probably even some Zoroastrians who feel exactly the same about their religious beliefs.

I can't read minds. But I do believe God makes Himself known. I know that makes it nigh impossible to continue discussion with me, as Azdgari gently told me. But I hate dishonesty, and I would be lying if I answered Jag any other way.